• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Tech blogger finds proof DNC chief's emails weren't 'doctored' despite claims

j-mac said:
:lamo I love it....But they've already ignored this because it came from FN instead of MSNBC, NYTimes, or WaPo.....
Click to expand...
CNN essentially fired Brazile. How is that ignoring it?
 
Slyfox696 said:
You don't think giving all sides an opportunity to present their case is balanced?
Yet another stereotypical whine.

They "grill" each side to different degrees depending on the person, not their political affiliation. For example, CNN essentially let Donald Trump say nearly anything he wanted unchallenged when he first declared his candidacy. Yet there were numerous times they gave Jeff Weaver a tough time (and other times when they let him off easy).

It's dependent upon the person and the things they say, not the political affiliation they hold.

You mean the Obamacare rate hikes they talked about nonstop for the past week or so and discussed at length how damaging it could be for Clinton (you know, before Comey's letter gave them another way to criticize Clinton)? Those rate hikes? That's your evidence?

That's a terrible argument. If they had spent a week speaking negatively about the Trump campaign before finally saying, "Meh, it may not be that bad", there's no way you'd consider that conservative bias. You're just cherry-picking the things you want to make your argument. It's not an honest argument.

No they are not. Clinton supporters are, but the hosts are not. The hosts and actual commentators are simply discussing the situation. This, of course, after spending nearly 24 hours straight implicating Clinton in a way Comey never did.

Nonsense. They've talked about the contents numerous times. You obviously don't watch.

So your problem is they are not spewing false propaganda? They've covered the Clinton e-mail situation ad nauseum. Simply having an outside e-mail server was not against the law at the time. That is false. Granting immunity is common in investigations, that's just more partisan hackery.

So your claim CNN is biased towards liberals is because they don't spew conservative partisan nonsense. Gotcha.

And they talked about "locker room talk" ad naseum, which was just a deflection for Trump. Once more, both sides.

Completely untrue. Numerous agencies have come out and said there is strong evidence it is Russia. You are just making up more stuff now.

You've said nothing to suggest your statement here is true. Your entire argument seems to be because they don't engage in baseless conspiracy theories and e-mail rumors, they are liberal. And that's just stupid and is indicative of the biggest problem with Republicans these days.

They are currently interviewing Jim Gilmore, a Republican former governor of Virginia. So they've had two Republican politicians on in my last two posts and zero Democrats. I think I'll just keep a running tally.
Click to expand...

CNN's "debate" was a slew of soft-tossed questions to Hillary (some of which were fed to her beforehand), and constant grilling of Trump about women. Never once was Hillary asked about how she stood idly by while her husband ran through women like a brothel.

They asked a soft question about the emails, and followed up with nothing. Changed the subject asap. Her grotesque violations of the law should be hammered ad nauseum, but they aren't.

If the roles were reversed, it would be 24/7 emails, emails, emails, and you know it.

Long posts don't equal substantive thought.
 
tres borrachos said:
Gergen is most definitely not a dolt. He's a very smart man.
Click to expand...

Gergen is a smart man, no doubt....Problem is that the times they are a changin', and the old guard like Gergen who today represent more the establishment than they do the current state of things really do more to aid the liberal left in political thinking today than not....
 
Erod said:
CNN's "debate" was a slew of soft-tossed questions to Hillary (some of which were fed to her beforehand), and constant grilling of Trump about women. Never once was Hillary asked about how she stood idly by while her husband ran through women like a brothel.
Click to expand...
What are you talking about? CNN didn't have a debate between Trump and Clinton. There was a Presidential debate between the two, but that was carried by all stations. And there's no evidence any questions during the Presidential debate were fed to Clinton, that was during the Democratic primaries.

Either you have information I don't (unlikely) or you are very confused as to what you are talking about (possibly) or you are just making things up (most likely).

They asked a soft question about the emails, and followed up with nothing. Changed the subject asap. Her grotesque violations of the law should be hammered ad nauseum, but they aren't.
Click to expand...
They didn't hammer Trump about Trump Foundation or the fact he's being sued for the rape of an underage girl either. Does that mean they went soft on Trump? Of course not.

Stop with the persecution complex already.

If the roles were reversed, it would be 24/7 emails, emails, emails, and you know it.
Click to expand...
No it wouldn't. And it HAS been 24/7 e-mails for the last several days. And you know it.

Actually, you probably don't.

Long posts don't equal substantive thought.
Click to expand...
That's a pretty stupid thing to say. Quality posts are quality, regardless of their length. My posts have, every time, completely demolished your point and exposed your ignorance on this subject. And you STILL haven't tried to explain why a man who is a registered Republican who worked for numerous Republican Presidents isn't conservative.

Oh and CNN is talking about Clinton's e-mail again and now they are discussing why the FBI is tweeting link to documents about Bill pardoning someone. But sure, that's liberal bias, right?
j-mac said:
Gergen is a smart man, no doubt....Problem is that the times they are a changin', and the old guard like Gergen who today represent more the establishment than they do the current state of things really do more to aid the liberal left in political thinking today than not....
Click to expand...
So Gergen isn't a conservative because he's not a nutjob. Got it. :roll:

Just because someone isn't an extremist or doesn't engage in conspiracy theories, that doesn't disqualify them as a conservative (or liberal). It just means they are not a nutjob. I know it's trendy right now to use the word "establishment" to explain someone who isn't unreasonable or immature, but it's hardly a valid response to common sense discussion.
 
Slyfox696 said:
So Gergen isn't a conservative because he's not a nutjob. Got it.


Just because someone isn't an extremist or doesn't engage in conspiracy theories, that doesn't disqualify them as a conservative (or liberal). It just means they are not a nutjob. I know it's trendy right now to use the word "establishment" to explain someone who isn't unreasonable or immature, but it's hardly a valid response to common sense discussion.
Click to expand...


With snark like this it is a wonder why no one can have a conversation....But, go ahead and remain out of step with the country if you like...I am not advocating one way or the other...But your characterization that those that don't agree with you are just "extreme" or whatever pejorative you'd like to use is better served on the net where there is little chance any repercussions would occur....
 
Slyfox696 said:
What are you talking about? CNN didn't have a debate between Trump and Clinton. There was a Presidential debate between the two, but that was carried by all stations. And there's no evidence any questions during the Presidential debate were fed to Clinton, that was during the Democratic primaries.

Either you have information I don't (unlikely) or you are very confused as to what you are talking about (possibly) or you are just making things up (most likely).

They didn't hammer Trump about Trump Foundation or the fact he's being sued for the rape of an underage girl either. Does that mean they went soft on Trump? Of course not.

Stop with the persecution complex already.

No it wouldn't. And it HAS been 24/7 e-mails for the last several days. And you know it.

Actually, you probably don't.

That's a pretty stupid thing to say. Quality posts are quality, regardless of their length. My posts have, every time, completely demolished your point and exposed your ignorance on this subject. And you STILL haven't tried to explain why a man who is a registered Republican who worked for numerous Republican Presidents isn't conservative.

Oh and CNN is talking about Clinton's e-mail again and now they are discussing why the FBI is tweeting link to documents about Bill pardoning someone. But sure, that's liberal bias, right?
So Gergen isn't a conservative because he's not a nutjob. Got it. :roll:

Just because someone isn't an extremist or doesn't engage in conspiracy theories, that doesn't disqualify them as a conservative (or liberal). It just means they are not a nutjob. I know it's trendy right now to use the word "establishment" to explain someone who isn't unreasonable or immature, but it's hardly a valid response to common sense discussion.
Click to expand...

So they did it once, but certainly not again, right?

Please. Your party was built in these measures.
 
j-mac said:
With snark like this it is a wonder why no one can have a conversation....But, go ahead and remain out of step with the country if you like...I am not advocating one way or the other...But your characterization that those that don't agree with you are just "extreme" or whatever pejorative you'd like to use is better served on the net where there is little chance any repercussions would occur....
Click to expand...
That's not at all what I said. I said this notion David Gergen isn't conservative because he doesn't engage in outlandish fairy tales or deal in conspiracy theories is absurd. Just because one doesn't engage in extremism, that doesn't make him any less conservative (or liberal).

In other words, just because YOU don't agree with David Gergen, that doesn't make him less of a conservative. And if you think holding rational positions means he's not a conservative, then the problem is you, not him.
Erod said:
So they did it once, but certainly not again, right?
Click to expand...
Who is "they"? You also ignored all the different ways I, once again, proved you wrong about CNN.

Please. Your party was built in these measures.
Click to expand...
I don't have a party. That's just more stupid partisanship from you, much like your entire position in this thread has been.

You're wrong. You've been proven wrong. I know it's hard to admit, but you simply should.
 
Slyfox696 said:
I completely agree. Again, there are many times where I don't agree, but I love the fact he's an actual analyst and is willing to address reality, which seems to be so lacking this election season with Trump supporters.
Click to expand...
I think what infuriates people on the right about Gergen is that he will give a fairly objective view of republican politics rather than toe the party line. So, when you have a panel of 3 liberals and Gergen, it tends to leave the right unrepresented. Personally, I think people like Gergen have more credibility than party hacks who never see or say anything bad about someone on their side of the isle.
 
Fletch said:
I think what infuriates people on the right about Gergen is that he will give a fairly objective view of republican politics rather than toe the party line. So, when you have a panel of 3 liberals and Gergen, it tends to leave the right unrepresented. Personally, I think people like Gergen have more credibility than party hacks who never see or say anything bad about someone on their side of the isle.
Click to expand...
That's very possible. I just know I always love when he's on because he seemingly always has well thought out points and provides a perspective which sometimes is missing in those types of discussions.
 
Fletch said:
I think what infuriates people on the right about Gergen is that he will give a fairly objective view of republican politics rather than toe the party line. So, when you have a panel of 3 liberals and Gergen, it tends to leave the right unrepresented. Personally, I think people like Gergen have more credibility than party hacks who never see or say anything bad about someone on their side of the isle.
Click to expand...

It's like the old joke about Middle Eastern diplomacy: All meetings start with an exchange of mutual admiration... we applaud them on their proud history and beautiful religion and they compliment us on speaking the truth about their greatness.
 
Slyfox696 said:
Who is "they"? You also ignored all the different ways I, once again, proved you wrong about CNN.

I don't have a party. That's just more stupid partisanship from you, much like your entire position in this thread has been.

You're wrong. You've been proven wrong. I know it's hard to admit, but you simply should.
Click to expand...

You can keep this up all you want. EVERYBODY knows CNN is violently biased toward the DNC. Everybody. The fact that you don't makes you weird and ignorant, not "right", as you keep claiming to be.

You must have one of those signs on your bathroom mirror, "I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggonit, people like me." Your obsession with self-affirmation is comical, if not sad.
 
Erod said:
You can keep this up all you want. EVERYBODY knows CNN is violently biased toward the DNC. Everybody. The fact that you don't makes you weird and ignorant, not "right", as you keep claiming to be.

You must have one of those signs on your bathroom mirror, "I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggonit, people like me." Your obsession with self-affirmation is comical, if not sad.
Click to expand...

How is CNN "violently" biased towards the DNC. Do they club over the head people from the RNC? :lamo hyperbole much dude?
 
Praxas said:
How is CNN "violently" biased towards the DNC. Do they club over the head people from the RNC? :lamo hyperbole much dude?
Click to expand...

Figuratively, yes. They have a seat at the DNC table right next to Hillary. They're good soldiers, in an Avon Barksdale/Stringer Bell kind of way.
 
Erod said:
Figuratively, yes. They have a seat at the DNC table right next to Hillary. They're good soldiers, in an Avon Barksdale/Stringer Bell kind of way.
Click to expand...

Yeah and fox news wasn't the mouthpiece for GWB when he was president. :roll: I don't claim that there isn't bias, there is bias in ALL the media. Just by deciding what to report on is technically biased no matter what the media outlet.

However to act like this is new is being disingenuous at best.
 
Erod said:
Tech blogger finds proof DNC chief's emails weren't 'doctored' despite claims | Fox News



Donna Brazile is the prototypical Democrat politician. Yet another corrupt, lying bitch just like Hillary.

And she was deeply rooted at CNN, where she could direct traffic as needed.

You think CNN will report on this? LOL, yeah right.
Click to expand...

My blood boils when this lady comes out and talks about persecution. She knows flat out what she did - she is a fraud and a liar and her ancestors who fought and were truly persecuted would be turning over in their graves. Anyone here or anywhere who wants to defend her - defend her words is absolutely crazy. This is the kind of stuff that needs to stop in our country. She didn't just help herself to the top position in the DNC, but she abused her oath to the American People. I don't understand why there aren't grave consequences for this lady (and I use the term loosely). What kind of image does she set for other women in her field? And Hillary, wow. She wants to talk about abusing women, she should be tared and feathered for her words. As the first female Presidential Candidate to be such a fraud - such a horrible leader - such a horrendous female role model - again, anyone who would vote for this lady must have a loose screw somewhere in their brain.
 
Praxas said:
Yeah and fox news wasn't the mouthpiece for GWB when he was president. :roll: I don't claim that there isn't bias, there is bias in ALL the media. Just by deciding what to report on is technically biased no matter what the media outlet.

However to act like this is new is being disingenuous at best.
Click to expand...

Go read the OP again. This is about Brazile.
 
Erod said:
Go read the OP again. This is about Brazile.
Click to expand...

It's called a comparison, don't like it you have three choices. Ignore it, report me, or bugger off. Take your pick bro. The comparison is VALID.
 
EvaPeron said:
My blood boils when this lady comes out and talks about persecution. She knows flat out what she did - she is a fraud and a liar and her ancestors who fought and were truly persecuted would be turning over in their graves. Anyone here or anywhere who wants to defend her - defend her words is absolutely crazy. This is the kind of stuff that needs to stop in our country. She didn't just help herself to the top position in the DNC, but she abused her oath to the American People. I don't understand why there aren't grave consequences for this lady (and I use the term loosely). What kind of image does she set for other women in her field? And Hillary, wow. She wants to talk about abusing women, she should be tared and feathered for her words. As the first female Presidential Candidate to be such a fraud - such a horrible leader - such a horrendous female role model - again, anyone who would vote for this lady must have a loose screw somewhere in their brain.
Click to expand...

Speaking of women....consider the actions of this gaggle.

Hillary Clinton - Under FBI investigation
Donna Brazile - this thread and more
Debbie Wasserman-Shultz - Fired for her emails against Bernie Sanders
Cheryl Mills - Asked for immunity, then served as counsel for Hillary
Huma Abedin - Under FBI investigation.
Loretta Lynch - Making deals/taking orders on a plane from Bill Clinton.

Are these the women we want setting the examples for young women in America?
 
Praxas said:
It's called a comparison, don't like it you have three choices. Ignore it, report me, or bugger off. Take your pick bro. The comparison is VALID.
Click to expand...

We could do such comparisons all day. Sean Hannity didn't serve as RNC chairman, and this is about an election in a week.
 
Erod said:
You can keep this up all you want. EVERYBODY knows CNN is violently biased toward the DNC.
Click to expand...
No, only Republicans/conservatives with a persecution complex believe that. Anyone who actually watches CNN programming without bias knows it is exactly how I've described. Mostly liberal hosts with a crapton of Republican/conservative guests and pundits.

By the way, when I ran home to take care of something over lunch, Blitzer was interviewing Chris Collins, Republican lawmaker. So now we're up to 3 or 4 Republicans when I post and zero Democrats.
 
Slyfox696 said:
No, only Republicans/conservatives with a persecution complex believe that. Anyone who actually watches CNN programming without bias knows it is exactly how I've described. Mostly liberal hosts with a crapton of Republican/conservative guests and pundits.

By the way, when I ran home to take care of something over lunch, Blitzer was interviewing Chris Collins, Republican lawmaker. So now we're up to 3 or 4 Republicans when I post and zero Democrats.
Click to expand...

You're about the only person here who believes this nonsense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom